HEAR! HEAR! On a smaller scale, that's my philosophy as well.
On 8/4/20 1:27 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
I'm convinced that the "influencers" (smart people with a youtube
channel or blog) on the Interwebs are really just bunch of ignorant
baboons going "oooo, ahhh, ooooo, ahhhh" over every bobble that is new
and shiny, but really are clueless in regard to what "art" is all
about. They equate technical specifications with quality, and features
with usability.
We see it in nearly every area. Cars, bicycles, cameras, watches,
cellphones, espresso makers, computers, etc. Oh, and never forget home
stereo systems! The fact is that in all of these listed topics, the
"90% Rule" is achieved pretty easily and without too much investment.
It's a logarithmic thing. It takes a huge amount of money to see very
little improvement beyond a reasonably attainable point. The problem
is that the fun and/or usability factor is the inverse. As the
investment in that car gets higher, the amount of fun driving that car
goes down. While some items truly have a shelf life, as a general
rule, the ones that are designed for the 90% point seem to have the
longest legs and the greatest usability over time. Typically, they
also have the best price/performance through to the point of disposal.
It's possible to buy/sell/flip items through the cycle and improve
ROI, just as it is possible to buy/sell/flip items and lose your
shirt.
In regards to cameras, this has been well represented by the halo
products, the professional grade products, and the consumer or low-end
products. These days, the halo products are full-frame mirrorless
cameras with 50+ MP sensors. The lenses are massive, highly corrected
monstrosities that cost as much as a brand new Toyota Corolla. The
problem I see with these top-grade items is the overall "usability"
has topped out and actually goes the opposite direction. The more
expensive, bigger, and heavier the item, the less likely I am to carry
it with me.
This is personal to me with my various camera systems. The recent
acquisition of the Sony A7 Mk2 is a near-perfect example reaching the
90% point with relatively little cost. For $1000, I was able to get a
brand-new full-frame 24MP camera WITH a kit lens. For just a few
dollars more, and I have an adapter to use an entire fleet of
high-quality lenses. For the cost of a trade-in of an EXTREMELY
well-used (totally worn out) Canon 6D, I got a Panasonic GX85 with two
lens kit. For a minimal spend, I got three Kodak-CCD Olympus cameras
AND a lens. For another minimal spend, I'm looking to expand that kit
further. Most are comfortably high up on the curve, nesting in
someplace near the 90% point. My investment is low, but the return is
high. Would I like one of those brand-new Sony A7R Mk 23 cameras?
Sure! Would I get value out of it? Probably not.
There are days when I grab a specific camera and set of lenses based
on the specifics of what I'm doing or where I'm going. There are days
when I'll pick something completely different. Sometimes, I'll grab
three systems at once! The point is that no one system is "best" 100%
of the time. They are all compromises. The better systems do more or
even all, but at a cost--both monetary and physical.
The "influencers" are almost always wrong in regards to this. They
equate cost/features/newness with ultimate value, but they miss out on
the intangibles. Just because something is "best" may completely be in
opposition to what is usable. However, it is too easy to go the other
way and place unrealistic benefit to something that is actually too
small and limited. Cell-phone cameras certainly fit into this
category. The problem I have with cell-phone cameras is that they
aren't NOT anywhere near the 90% point as a photography tool. What
they do well, they do VERY well, but what they can do well is a
limited subset of my photography needs.
The influencers, however, typically determine what photography needs
are based on their own definitions and desires. If Bokeh is your god,
then deep DoF is a tool of the devil.
I would like to delve into why I grab a specific camera for a specific
type of picture, but that goes deep into my own definitions and
desires as a photographer.
AG Schnozz
--
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|